Abstract

The personality
characteristics between martial-arts students, assistant instructors, and their
senior instructors were investigated. The participants come from seven various
martial arts schools in Illinois (n = 104). The types of martial arts schools
that participated included various forms of karate (e.g. Dentokan, Shotokan,
etc.) and Tae Kwon Do. The personality traits measured were locus of control
(LOC), need for cognition (NFC), goals and motivation (GM), and anxiety (ANX).
The previous traits listed could be associated with leadership qualities.
Findings suggest that there are no significant personality differences between
head instructors and assistant instructors. There are, however, significant
differences between head instructors and their students as well as assistant
instructors and students. These findings indicate the original hypothesis that
stated personalities become less varied in the higher levels the martial arts
social hierarchy is supported. Future applications and implications of this
research is relevant to understanding the dynamics within any type
super-ordinate/sub-ordinate relationship within hierarchal indoctrination-like
social systems.

A Brief History on Leadership

A leader, in general, is
anyone that is looked up to. Usually, it is someone who outranks another in a
hierarchy; it is someone who is in a super-ordinate position. This general
definition is not limited to the President of the United States or other
government positions but can cover a broad range of everyday relationships
including teacher-student relationships, boss-employee relationships,
coach-athlete relationships, etc. Much psychological research has been
conducted focusing on leaders and leadership. Many have asked the following
questions: 1) What psychological reasons do we choose certain leaders? 2)
What makes us stay with someone who is a leader? And 3) Do leaders have
anything in common? Many of these questions can be answered by looking at the
history of the psychological study of leadership.

To better understand why it
is important to look at the similarities between instructors and students,
especially the leadership qualities within the dynamics of super-subordinate
relationships, one should be briefed on the history of leadership studies.
According to Kremer et al. (2003), many questions about leaders and leadership
have socio-psychological roots that started in Victorian literature. During
this era, literature described “great men” who were prominent figures in human
history and world development. Kremer et al. (2003) continue by stating that
this led to the development of “metatheory” - the belief that through meticulous
experimentation and ardent research it would be possible to make general rules
of behavior that dictate variable relationships. The goal of the “great man
approach was to provide a formula” of physical and psychological attributes that
would epitomize a quality leader.

Kremer et al. (2003) conclude
their brief history by discussing the successor to metatheory, the zeitgeist.
The zeitgeist approach suggests that strict formula approaches to
leadership fail because leadership qualities are dependant upon historical and
situational factors. The reasoning behind this approach is based on the failed
meta-theory attempts to quantitatively create a formula that covers every
leader in every situation.

Even within the same
historical setting, it can be easily argued that an intellectually-gifted CEO
that manages to get his or her company out of debt may not be the best candidate
to fill a physically demanding military field officer position in the military.
Although these are both very important positions that require leadership, it is
obvious that the required traits and attributes for each are different.

In more recent attempts to
define leadership, during the First World War, researcher Bass (1990) states
military leaders leaned on psychology in order to identify “potential leadership
material.” Since the middle of the 20th century other variables have
been researched in hopes of finding answers to psychology’s questions to
leadership, including gender, gender role, and the type of material taught
(Freeman, 1994).

Generalized Applicationof Leadership Traits

Studies in
attempt to gain insight into leadership qualities have been long since sought
after. Large quantities of psychological research have been conducted in
attempts to figure out the defining characteristics of leaders or future
leaders. Super-ordinate
to sub-ordinate relationships are everywhere. Boss-employee,
coach-athlete, and teacher student relationships are just to name a few. People
are always trying to “get to the top.” Employees seek to become managers. Some
college students go to graduate school and some even aspire to get their
doctorate degrees. However, in order to climb any hierarchy, one is evaluated;
super-ordinates are always looking for people with potential leadership
capabilities.

In everyday job
settings, human beings conduct their own small-scale evaluation of others trying
to climb the corporate ladder - the interview. Humans are always evaluating
one another, either unconsciously by social comparison or whenever one is trying
to not promote an incompetent person to a level wherein a certain competency is
required. However, in looking at the dynamics of the interview process a very
important realization occurred.

Research by Breakwell (1990)
suggested that the process of interviewing has become unreliable because of its
internal, two-way dynamic interaction; the functionality of verbal and
non-verbal cues, and the perception thereof, influences the outcome. What this
means, in short, is the interview process is reflexive, or circular and two-way,
and subjective. This makes sense, because both parties’ communication, verbal
and non-verbal, will have a direct effect on each other, and this impacts the
subjective nature of the interview process. This subjectivism, however, exists
in everyday communication as well, not just interviews. Therefore our
perceptions are always playing a role in evaluating others. Even in martial
arts, rank evaluations are subjective (Sylvia and Pindur, 1978).

Because communication can be
subjective in nature, one’s perceptions become important in understanding what
makes a good leader. For example, an interviewer, a manager at a prestigious
hotel, is looking for someone to fulfill a leadership position. The interviewee
for the position of assistant manager, in turn, looks up to the interviewer as a
leader to model, imitate, etc. The interviewing manager will look for someone
that people will follow and look up to. Because the interviewer will be
someone who is looking for someone who is still going to be their subordinate in
some way, shape, or form, they want someone who will respect and follow their
every decision. Furthermore, the interviewee, who will become the interviewer’s
subordinate, will take up the position if he or she feels that they are
competent and can meet the demands of the future employer. Furthermore, he or
she must be able to agree with the demands of the interviewer’s futures
requests. Now, the question arises, “What motivates a person to become
compliant to the requests of their super-ordinate?”

Field Theory On Personality

Kurt Lewin (1951) stated that
behavior is a function of one’s environment, or simply put B = f (e). This is
often cited as Lewin’s Field theory. Everything that goes on in one’s
environment impacts his or her behavior. This environment can be a workplace,
school setting, or just life at home. In certain settings, the environment can
cause individuals to become compliant, face punishment, be promoted, or even
withdraw.

One might ask the question,
“What type environment can be researched that affects everyone’s behavior in the
same way?” Obviously, there is boot camp, America’s most prevalent “status
degradation ceremony” so-to-speak, but sometimes that is not so easy to study,
unless one is in the military. However, a more easily accessible indoctrination
process with a hierarchal structure exists where a personality change occurs for
almost everyone along his or her path – a martial arts class. Here are the
following reasons why:

1. Everyone begins with
a white belt. This is the equivalent of losing one’s identity or the
equivalent of having one’s head shaven or becoming just another “Private Pyles”
in the military. One’s status has just been allocated to the lowest part of the
hierarchy. In some schools, some instructors make students test for their white
belt.

2. One’s rank is
displayed for everyone else to see. It is obvious where one lies in the
hierarchy, and they know it. Furthermore, one knows what they must do, and act
like, to go up the ranks. At some schools, if one fails a rank test, it is
possible to be demoted.

3. Every martial arts
school has some sort of qualities/philosophy that is indoctrinated into their
students. For
example the Tae Kwon Do practitioner is the embodiment of the Tenants of Tae
Kwon Do: Courtesy, Integrity, Perseverance, Self-Control, and the Indomitable
Spirit. Often, these traits must be memorized and displayed for one to go up in
the ranks.

4. Every student within
a martial art does the same thing.
Yes, some people train harder than others outside the martial arts school, but
in the class everyone follows the training regimen, sometimes to the chief
instructors count. For example, a hypothetical class schedule may be stretching
followed by break-falls, basics, and then sparring. Any deviation or disrespect
can lead to punishment (push-ups, laps, more grueling break-falls, or holding a
static stance just to name a few) from his or her instructor.

5. Everyone listens to
super-ordinate
ranks. This is the natural order of hierarchies. Students listen to
assistant instructor; assistant instructors listen to the head instructor.

6. Everyone imitates in
the beginning.
Although martial-artists become more innovative and creative due to their own
personal tastes, physical attributes, and creativity, one must recognize the
fact that everyone had to learn the same thing, the same basics. In martial
arts classes, students imitate assistant instructors or the head instructor.
This is usually done visually by participant observation. Bandura’s common
knowledge on modeling indirectly suggests that we will model those who outrank
us, especially in strict hierarchal systems like martial arts.

It is because of this
hierarchal system within martial arts schools and other social settings, such as
the military, work, and other administrations, that researchers can look at the
important character traits of a leader, as specifically defined by the
sensitivity of a job. The nature of these hierarchal, indoctrination systems is
conducive to the commonality between the super-ordinate and sub-ordinate. In
essence, this is more a zeitgeist than a metatheory approach when
understanding leadership qualities in each different hierarchy.

Personality In Teaching.

Narrowing
down the research, one can see how personality in super-ordinate and subordinate
relationships has an effect on perceived effectiveness by a student. Sherman and Blackburn (1974)
suggested that an instructor’s teaching characteristics are not nearly as
important as his or her personality. Therefore, from a liking-similarity
theoretical framework, which briefly states that we like those most similar to
ourselves, that although someone may be an amazing martial arts instructor, if
there is no congruence in similarity, a student may choose to withdraw from
training with that instructor. So in time, those who are least like their head
instructors may opt out of his or her classes.

Research by Hart and Driver
(1978) asked the two following questions: “Do student evaluations differ as a
function of differences in the instructors personalities?” and “Will students
perceive teachers who are more like them in personality as being most
effective?” Hart and Driver’s findings indicate that only their first
hypothesis was supported but state “it would be worthwhile to make a
comparison between the grades of students with different degrees of
instructor-student similarity.”

Personality In the Martial
Arts

Researcher
Jorge Gleser (1988) coined the term the “Ju principle.” Ju is a
Japanese syllable. Roughly translated it means “gentle.” For example judo
means “gentle way” or aiki-jujitsu means “harmonious, gentle art.”
Gleser’s ju principle is the idea of yielding, or being compliant, in
psychotherapeutic practices. However, moving away from psychotherapy and
focusing more on the martial art, Gleser alludes to the idea a person begins to
embody values associated within his or her study of martial arts.

Weiser and Kutz (1995) state
“…[martial arts] teach the values of directness and honesty in communication,
assertiveness, ability to empathize, courage, humility, perseverance,
gentleness, respect for others, responsibility, and self improvement.”
Psychological benefits from martial arts are caused by the “confrontation of
one’s self and others” (Spear, 1989). Attendance in a martial arts class,
therefore, has an effect on one’s personality. However, the effect can be
positive or negative.

How Type of Training In
Martial Arts Effects Personality

The effects from training in
various martial arts have inherent physical and psychological effects. The
effects of training reflect on the type of martial art and how it is practiced.
Tai Chi is a “soft art” characterized by smooth, fluid, circular movements. In
a study by Kutner et al. (1997), 200 participants were allocated into two
different classes. One class was a Tai Chi class. The other class was an
individualized balance training class. Follow-up research indicated that only
participants in the Tai Chi class experienced an overall life change.

There is an irony to the
above study. Tai Chi is currently practiced by an “older” population for its
recently discovered health benefits. According to general Chinese medicine, Tai
Chi has always had health benefits experienced by its practitioners. These
benefits, which include lessened anxiety, flexibility, and longevity, are caused
by a vital energy called chi, ki, or qi depending on the country of the
Orient. Chi flows along meridians, or lines across the body; this flow
of energy, in turn, affects one’s health. However, health-related practice is
only one focus to Tai Chi. This current trend of “Tai Chi for health” focuses on
the non-violent, peaceful application of the art and its practitioners, in turn,
become non-violent and peaceful. Yet, there is another side.

According to some martial
artists, Tai-Chi has a deadly application as well. Historically, this is
supported by acupuncturist records of the Ming dynasty of China
(McCarthy, 1995). Striking particular vital points of the body can lead to a
quick or delayed death. This is not only applicable to Tai Chi, but any other
combative martial art. Many people overlook the deadly application aspect of
martial arts, especially Tai Chi.

If “soft arts” were taught
like some “hard arts” where the emphasis was placed more on power, aggression,
and how much damage one can inflict in one blow, would “soft art” stylists
become more aggressive in their nature? Research (Davidson, as quoted from
Goleman, 2002) suggests that personalities can be shifted to become more or less
peacefully predispositioned by the things we do. Actions and feelings stimulate
a shift in activity in our left and right prefrontal cortices. This in turn
influences our emotion. Furthermore, because of neuroplasticity, a brain can be
rewired to be prone to a certain emotion. Therefore, the way we train in
martial arts affects our personality and our leadership qualities. According to
Freeman (1994), the values and qualities one experiences becomes a model for the
student that is applied to other aspects of his or her life.

Influence of Hierarchy and
Leadership in Martial Arts

Authors (Biddle and Thomas,
1966) say that people will adopt behaviors and attitudes from those who are in
the same role. Sylvia and Pindur (1978) state that we will mimic the attitudes,
skills, values and techniques of those who are more experienced within the same
social hierarchy. Sylvia and Pindur (1978) continue by stating, “Role learning
is affected by situational characteristics.” Findings by Sylvia and Pindur
(1978) suggest that there is a strong, significant correlation between the
attitudes of students and their instructors.

**Sylvia and Pindur on
Correlation of Response Patterns on Attitude Questionnaire

In a rigid social hierarchy,
like martial arts, it would make sense that people would become more similar as
a function of time, because everyone’s situational experience is relatively the
same within the dojo. However, this hypothesis is not supported by Sylvia and
Pindur (1978). Their findings suggest state that socialization takes place
early and is independent of time and rank.

Martial arts schools are hierarchal,
indoctrination-like social systems. Because of their rigidity, participants
share the same experiences. Also, during this same time, modeling of
super-ordinate positions occurs. These in-class experiences and modeling yield
similar personalities among members. These similar personalities contain
leadership qualities, such as a high need for cognition, strong locus of
control, and strong motivation. Due to the subjective and reflexive nature of
evaluation, those who have leadership qualities most similar to their
instructors will be promoted to the next rank. Those who lack leadership
qualities similar to their instructor will not be promoted. Not being promoted
has nothing to do with being liked by the instructor, but not being qualified by
displaying the attitude of one who is to be promoted to a higher rank. Or,
because of this lack of attitude similarity as perceived by the student, there
are differences in values that cause him or her to withdraw from classes.
Hence, time “weeds out” those who are dissimilar from their instructor. Below
is an illustration:

McGee
Hypothesis Model:
Similarity by Indoctrination as a Function of Time in Martial Arts

Similarity
Perpetuates Itself/Leadership Qualities Reinforced

Person Similar à
Promotion

Indoctrination
Same Experiences and

Modeling of Higher Ranks
Person Dissimilar à Withdrawal

Person Recycled/Relearning of Qualities

Time

Method

Participants

The sample
consisted of seven, Illinois martial arts clubs - students, assistant
instructors, and chief instructors (n = 104). The age range was from 8 to 56
years old. There were 72 males and 32 females. No one dropped out of the
study; however, some surveys were not recorded because they were incomplete.
Instructors were informed that they would be given the results of the research
after data was analyzed.

Changes to the study

Originally, this study was
intended to include an overseas population from Northern Ireland. However, due
to time constraints and communication difficulties, the survey was only
administered to area martial arts school. Also, this study was originally
limited to those over the age of twelve, but after the surveys were administered
and collected, there were some participants under the age of twelve. After
acquiring permission from my faculty sponsor, these participants were included
in the research data. Because these individuals were of significant rank in
their respected martial arts style, it would be possible to compare the effects
of their long-term training on their personality to other students in their age
group. Finally, the operationalized hypothesis called for those martial arts
schools that returned 15 or more surveys to be included in this study. Only
those martial arts schools returning 15 or more surveys had analysis run on them
comparing students, assistant instructors, and the head instructor. The only
change in this respect is that those schools that did not return the required
amount of surveys were used in a cumulative data analysis looking for a
generalized trend among students, assistant instructors, and all the head
instructors from the local martial arts schools.

Testing Materials

Participants were administered a 28-question
personality survey based on a 7-point Likert scale. The survey was broken up
into four sections excluding demographic information. Part one’s focus was
internal locus of control (LOC), or how much responsibility one places on
him or herself (Weiner, 1974; modified by Eggleston, 2000). Part two’s focus
was need for cognition (NFC) which is how much one likes to think (Eggleston,
2000). Part three involved goals and motivation (GM) (Eggleston, 2000). Part
four’s focus was anxiety (ANX) (Burns, 1993).

Procedure

After its first
field test, the survey was modified and truncated. Next, the survey was field
tested on a 12-year-old martial arts student, after the parental consent form
was signed. The only explanation needed by the 12-year-old was an explanation
of a Likert scale. The survey only took 7 minutes for the karate student to
complete. Students under the age of 18 were given consent forms to be signed by
their parents or guardian. Then surveys were administered at seven area martial
arts schools and collected by the researcher. The four sections and the title
of the survey were deceptively titled to avoid demand characteristics.
Instructors were informed of this deception ahead of time. Instructors
debriefed students after surveys were administered. Data from each dojo
(martial arts school) was analyzed using SPSS.

Results

Results for Dojo A

Participants in
Dojo A (n = 22) were martial arts students enrolled in an instructors track Tae
Kwon Do class. T-tests were run to determine the significant differences
between instructors, assistant instructors, and students.

T-tests run on
internal locus of control (LOC) revealed that there was no significant
difference between the head instructor and assistant instructors (t = .203; p =
.852). Although not significant, t-tests reveal that there is less similarity
between the head instructor and the students (t = 1.009; p = .328) than between
the instructor and assistant instructors. Furthermore, the least similarity
lies between the assistant instructors and the students (t = 1.165; p = .123).

T-tests run on
need for cognition (NFC) reveal assistant instructors as having more
similarities to students than the head instructor (p = .955 > p = .062). There
was a significant difference between the head instructor and the students (t =
2.279; p = .037).

T-tests run on
goals and motivation (GM) revealed no significant differences. However, there
was a greater difference between the head instructor and his or her students (t
= 1.299; p = .285) than the head instructor and the assistant instructors (t =
1.299; p = .212).

T-tests run on
anxiety (ANX) revealed no significant differences. When comparing the head
instructor to the students, the most notable, but insignificant, difference
occurs (t = -2.048; p = .057).

Graph
of Means for Dojo A (n = 22)

LOC – Locus of
Control NFC – Need for Cognition

GM – Goals and
Motivation ANX - Anxiety

A graph of the means
best illustrates whom the assistant instructors are more similar to. In the
case of Dojo A, assistant instructors are more similar to the head instructor in
terms of internal locus of control and anxiety levels. However, assistant
instructors are more similar the students in terms of need for cognition as well
as goals and motivation.

Results for Dojo B

Dojo B is a karate class held
within a church. This class is not an instructors track course. But it could
be argued that all martial arts courses could be instructor-track oriented,
because students strive to attain their black belt. T-tests run on Dojo B were
conducted in the same manner as Dojo A.

T-tests run on LOC revealed
that there was no significant difference between the head instructor and
assistant instructors (t = 1.440; p = .245). Although not significant, t-tests
revealed that there was the most similarity between the assistant instructor and
the students (t = .465; p = .647).

T-tests conducted
on NFC indicate that assistant instructors are more similar to the students than
the head instructor (p = .991 > p = .233).

GM t-tests
indicated that assistant instructors and the head instructors have a very
similar levels of motivation and goal oriented behavior (x1 =
42.0, x2 = 41.8; p =.938). There were no significant
differences, but the means suggest the hypothesized direction.

T-tests run on ANX
indicated no significant differences among the three positions. However, the
means suggest the predicted direction of the hypothesis.

Graph of Means for Dojo B (n = 22)

LOC – Locus of
Control NFC – Need for Cognition

GM – Goals and Motivation ANX
- Anxiety

In the case of Dojo B,
assistant instructors’ means are most similar to the head instructor in terms of
goals and motivation and anxiety levels. However, assistant instructors are
more similar the students in terms of internal locus of control, and need for
cognition.

Results for Dojo C

Dojo C is a
martial arts school located near a state university campus. It has the most
participants of any of the single martial art schools that participated.
However, the lack of assistant instructors led to insufficient data to run
t-tests between the head instructor and assistant instructor. There was only
one participant who achieved the status of assistant instructor.

T-tests that were
completed indicated that there were no significant differences in any of the
four personality traits between the head instructor and students as well as the
assistant instructor and the students. However, the means for anxiety fell in
the predicted direction. Much of the data for this dojo is inconclusive and
incomplete due to the lack of participants in the assistant instructor
category.

Graph of Means for Dojo C (n = 30)

LOC – Locus of
Control NFC – Need for Cognition

GM – Goals and Motivation ANX
- Anxiety

Dojo C’s results,
although having the largest population of the single dojos, may have been skewed
because there was only one assistant instructor. Regardless, the means for
anxiety fell in the predicted direction.

Cumulative Results

After all the data was
entered into SPSS, and all the single schools with an n ≥ 20 were analyzed,
every participant’s questionnaires were used in a cumulative study. Data
analysis was conducted the same way as single martial arts schools.

LOC t-tests
indicated a significant difference between the assistant instructors and
students (t = 1.995; p = .049). Furthermore, p-values and means indicated that
assistant instructors similar to the composite scores of seven, head
instructors.

NFC t-tests
indicated no significant differences among the head instructors, assistant
instructors, and students. However, p-values and means indicated that assistant
instructors were least similar to students (t = 2.016; p = .051).

T-tests run on GM
indicated a significant difference between the assistant instructors and
students (t = 4.232; p = .0001). Furthermore, data indicated head instructors
were significantly different from students (t = 2.012; p = .047). There was no
significant difference between the head instructors and the assistant
instructors (t = .279; p = .783).

T-test run on ANX indicated
no difference between the head instructors and assistant instructors (t =
-1.381; p = .180). There was a significant difference in anxiety between
assistant instructors and students (t = -2.849; p = .006). Furthermore, there
was a significant difference in anxiety between the head instructor and the
students (t = -2.968; p = .004).

Cumulative Graph of Means (n =104)

LOC – Locus of
Control NFC – Need for Cognition

GM – Goals and Motivation ANX
- Anxiety

In the larger, cumulative sample, assistant instructors’
means are more similar to the mean head instructors’ composite score in three
out of four personality categories. The composite assistant instructors means
score was closer to the mean composite score of all the student participants in
the need for cognition category. However, all means did fall in the predicted
direction.

Discussion

Direction of the Means

Results of this experiment
are semi-supportive of the original hypothesis. Although few significant
differences were found, means for Dojo A, Dojo B, and cumulative means were in
the predicted direction indicated in the hypothesis. For example, Dojo A’s
students had the lowest average need for cognition (x = 35.6). The
assistant instructors NFC average was 35.8. The head instructor’s NFC average
was the highest at 48.0. The instructors’ NFC average is also above the entire
group average (x = 36.2), the students’ averages lies below, and the
assistant instructors’ averages somewhere in between that of the students and
the head instructor. The position of the means for locus of control and goals
and motivation follow the same pattern. Dojo C is the outlier in this case, but
its inconsistency is caused by the lack of assistant instructor participants.

When looking at anxiety, the
order is reversed; the instructor has the lowest ANX score below the group ANX
mean and the students’ mean always above the group ANX mean. This suggests that
martial arts can contribute to stress-management.

Instructors vs. Assistant Instructors vs.
Students

Were the
assistant instructors more like the head instructors or the students? When
looking at individual martial arts schools, the similarity of assistant
instructors varied. However, with the larger, cumulative sample, research
indicates that assistant instructor personalities are more similar to the head
instructor personalities with the exception of NFC scores. Again, findings were
in the direction predicted.

It makes sense that
assistant instructors would have a higher internal locus of control than
students, because responsibility for one’s actions and the safety of students is
essential to a martial arts learning environment. It makes sense that a higher
need for cognition would be found among assistant instructors, because they
would practice more resulting in promotion and those who did not like the
analytical side of martial arts would withdraw or not pass rank evaluations.
Like need for cognition, goals and motivation scores of assistant instructors
were more similar to the head instructors.

Finally, assistant
instructors have significantly less anxiety as compared to students but not head
instructors. Confidence is gained through experiences. In the process of trial
and error, one receives criticisms. From this point, a student either learns or
withdraws. If a student learns from criticism, confidence is the byproduct,
which in turn reduces anxieties. Time weeds out those who have more anxiety or
less confidence.

Two Possible Conclusions

What may account
for the lack of significant differences but all data falling in the predicted
directions could be the following common knowledge: “The cowardly never begin,
and the weak die off.” Those who join martial arts systems may be individuals
who are very responsible, intellectually curious, as well as highly motivated in
the first place. Martial arts enthusiasts are very motivated people, and it is
the enthusiast that one day becomes the instructor. Again, those who lack the
responsibility, analytical capabilities, and motivation or goal-oriented mindset
never make it to the higher ranks that are designated for assistant instructors
and the head instructor.

The cumulative t-tests indicate
something that contradicts the original hypothesis. Assistant instructors are
more significantly different to students than are the head instructors. Common
reasoning suggests that the head instructors would differ the most from
students, not the assistant instructors. However, the modeling of students and
the creativity of assistant instructors can explain this contradiction. In the
lower ranks, novice martial artists mimic everything – movements and personality
traits. This is done in an attempt to fit into the social hierarchy and, in
turn, highly resemble the head instructor.

However, as a student becomes
more competent, he or she may become an assistant instructor. It is at this
point a martial artist realizes a very important aspect to his or her training.
A martial art is a combative art form, one that is open to personal
interpretation and independent thought. A student realizes that due to body
type, physical capabilities, and physical limitations that what works for his or
her instructor may not personally work for them. Also, during this time, an
assistant is usually encouraged by his or her instructor to engage in activities
by which interpretation and application of martial arts movements is part of
training and evaluation. These conditions of capabilities and personal
interpretation put an assistant instructor on a totally different level than the
student that is still modeling the head instructor. This might explain why
assistant instructors differ more from students than the head instructors.

Future Implications &
Considerations

Sample sizes of the single
martial arts schools analyzed should be larger. However, this is a difficult
task in a rural private/commercial martial arts schools. Had this research been
done on the East Coast where martial arts schools are more prevalent and have a
large student population, then the research would have yielded more accurate
results.

Perhaps different
personality traits could have been analyzed. Locus of control, need for
cognition, goals and motivation, and anxiety are important leadership traits.
However, other personality characteristics like aggression, humbleness, and
perception of others could be analyzed.

Future
implications of this study could be applied to any super-ordinate to
sub-ordinate relationship. Within martial arts schools there is a relatively
large time away from class and, therefore, a lot more time to be affected by
external factors. Perhaps more significant results would be found in more
controlled environments like the military, communal societies (e.g. the Oneidans),
gangs, or cults.

Spear, R.K. (1989).
Military Physical and Psychological Conditioning: Comparison of Four Physical
Training Systems. Journal of the International Council for Health, Physical
Education and Recreation, 25, pp 30-32